Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » setting aside
THE ABSENCE OF A GOOD REASON FOR NOT ATTENDING A TRIAL LEADS TO DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE BEING REFUSED

THE ABSENCE OF A GOOD REASON FOR NOT ATTENDING A TRIAL LEADS TO DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE BEING REFUSED

March 9, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of Deputy Master Scher in Miah v Ullah [2021] EWHC 3712 (Ch) contains an important reminder of the rigorous test a party has to meet when they fail to appear at a trial.  The Master found that the…

DEFENDANTS FAIL TO HAVE DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE OF  US$3 MILLION SET ASIDE: DRAFT POINTS OF DISPUTE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE APPLICATION

DEFENDANTS FAIL TO HAVE DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE OF US$3 MILLION SET ASIDE: DRAFT POINTS OF DISPUTE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE APPLICATION

May 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  National Bank of Kazakhstan & Anor v The Bank of New York Mellon SA/NV, London Branch & Ors [2021] EWHC B7 (Costs) Costs Judge Rowley refused an application by the defendants to set aside a default costs certificate.  This…

COURT SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT OBTAINED 10 YEARS LATER: COURT FINDS THAT DOCUMENTS WERE FORGED BY DEFENDANTS: ANOTHER ROUND IN A BARE KNUCKLE FIGHT

COURT SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT OBTAINED 10 YEARS LATER: COURT FINDS THAT DOCUMENTS WERE FORGED BY DEFENDANTS: ANOTHER ROUND IN A BARE KNUCKLE FIGHT

October 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In March last year I wrote about the Supreme Court’s decision in Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd & Ors [2019] UKSC 13. In that case the Supreme Court held that a claimant could bring an action to set aside an earlier judgment which,…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 48: AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE  IS A REHEARING AND NOT A REVIEW (& NO NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE TIBBLES CRITERIA GETTING ITS CLAWS INTO THE CASE EITHER)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 48: AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE IS A REHEARING AND NOT A REVIEW (& NO NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE TIBBLES CRITERIA GETTING ITS CLAWS INTO THE CASE EITHER)

July 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

One point that arose from the Court of Appeal decision in Al-Zahra (PVT) Hospital & Ors v DDM [2019] EWCA Civ 1103 contains observations which indicate that it is easy to lose sight of a basic point in relation to orders…

THINKING OF MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR A WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTION? BEST READ THIS JUDGMENT

THINKING OF MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR A WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTION? BEST READ THIS JUDGMENT

June 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content

Any public body, indeed anyone, considering making an application for a without notice injunction is best advised to read the judgment of  Mr Justice Warby in Birmingham City Council v Afsar & Ors [2019] EWHC 1560 (QB).   “Urgency can…

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT'S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE  MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT’S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

August 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a short passage in the judgment today of Master Clark in Massimo Osti SRL v Global Design And Innovation Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2263 (Ch) that provides an important reminder of the relevant principles that apply when a…

LAST REMINDER OF NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION FOR 2017: WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS ARE SO, SO, DANGEROUS: THE DUTY OF FULL DISCLOSURE EXTENDS TO WEAKNESSES IN YOUR OWN CASE

LAST REMINDER OF NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION FOR 2017: WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS ARE SO, SO, DANGEROUS: THE DUTY OF FULL DISCLOSURE EXTENDS TO WEAKNESSES IN YOUR OWN CASE

December 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content

The one New Year’s Resolution I recommended to litigators for 2017 was to be very, very, wary of without notice applications. As we get near to the end of the year this advice is borne out by the judgment of…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A LITIGATOR MAKES A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT: A USEFUL CHECKLIST ON THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.